Earlier this month, energy and sustainability consultancy Regen published a new report examining whether Scotland's Community Climate Action Hubs could take ownership stakes in renewable energy developments and use the income generated to support local projects and climate action initiatives. 

The report, commissioned by the Climate Hubs network and supported by stakeholder engagement with developers, investors, government bodies and community energy organisations, comes at a time when many rural communities are asking a simple question: if large-scale wind, solar and offshore energy developments are being built in their areas, should local people have a greater share in the long-term financial benefits?

Some communities, including ours, have availed of community benefit funds provided by developers, but the Regen study explores a different approach. Instead of receiving annual payments, communities or community-led organisations could potentially become part-owners of renewable energy projects, creating a long-term income stream that lasts for the lifetime of a development.

For communities across the Highlands and elsewhere in rural Scotland, the idea is likely to attract both interest and scrutiny. Supporters see shared ownership as a way of retaining more renewable energy wealth within local areas, while others may question whether the financial risks, governance requirements and relatively modest early returns justify the investment. The report therefore provides a timely opportunity to examine not only whether shared ownership is possible, but whether it represents a meaningful benefit for the communities expected to host an ever-growing number of renewable energy developments.

This analysis looks at the report's findings from a rural community perspective, highlighting both the opportunities and the challenges identified within the evidence. 

At first glance, the concept appears attractive. Communities that host major wind, solar and offshore energy developments could potentially become genuine stakeholders in renewable energy infrastructure rather than solely recipients of developer-funded benefits.

While the evidence demonstrates that shared ownership can generate long-term income, it also highlights substantial financial, governance and practical challenges that rural communities would need to overcome. The report itself repeatedly acknowledges that returns are likely to be modest in the early years and that significant external finance would be required to make projects viable.

In the Highlands, where communities are increasingly being asked to host large-scale renewable developments, the question is not simply what financial returns shared ownership might deliver, but whether those returns adequately reflect the environmental, landscape and social impacts experienced by host communities

Overview of the Report
The study explored whether Community Climate Action Hubs could become investors in renewable energy projects through shared ownership arrangements. Research included stakeholder engagement with developers, investors, government bodies and support organisations, alongside financial modelling and analysis of future renewable energy project pipelines.

The report concludes that there are opportunities for shared ownership, particularly within onshore wind developments, and identifies several projects across Scotland where developers have already indicated support for such arrangements.

However, the report also recognises that renewable energy economics have changed considerably. Reduced subsidy levels, increasing construction costs, rising borrowing costs and greater investor caution mean that community ownership opportunities may be less financially attractive than they were a decade ago.

The central message is clear: shared ownership is not a quick source of community income. Instead, it is presented as a long-term investment strategy that may take many years before generating meaningful returns.

Potential for Long-Term Community Wealth Creation
The strongest potential benefit identified in the report is the possibility of moving communities beyond one-off grants and annual community benefit payments towards genuine asset ownership.

Unlike traditional community benefit funds, which remain entirely under developer control, shared ownership offers communities a direct financial stake in infrastructure operating within their area. If structured successfully, this could create income streams lasting decades.

Existing Developer Interest
The report found several developers already supportive of shared ownership arrangements and actively seeking community partners. This suggests there is an emerging market willing to engage with community organisations.

For rural communities that often feel excluded from decision-making processes, this willingness to discuss ownership represents a potentially positive shift in industry attitudes.

Strong Support Network
A notable strength identified throughout the report is the existence of a growing ecosystem of organisations supporting community energy, including:

• Local Energy Scotland
• Community Energy Scotland
• Development Trusts Association Scotland
• Foundation Scotland
• Forestry and Land Scotland
• Green Finance Institute
• Scottish National Investment Bank

These organisations provide expertise that many rural communities currently lack.

Risk Sharing Across Multiple Communities
The report suggests Climate Hubs could create portfolios of shared ownership investments across multiple projects and regions. This could spread risk and prevent individual communities from becoming financially dependent on the success or failure of a single development.

Government Policy Support
Both Scottish and UK governments continue to promote community involvement in renewable energy ownership

High Upfront Capital Requirements
One of the most significant weaknesses is the sheer scale of investment required.

The report's examples require:

£25 million for a 2% offshore wind stake.
£9.1 million for a 10% onshore wind stake.
£5.4 million for a 20% solar stake.
These figures are far beyond the reach of most rural communities without substantial borrowing.

Low Early Returns
A recurring theme throughout the report is that communities are likely to see little financial benefit during the early years.

Commercial lenders are paid first. Community returns are only received after operating costs and debt obligations have been met.

This means communities could be waiting a decade or more before seeing meaningful financial returns.

Dependence on External Finance
The report effectively acknowledges that shared ownership only becomes attractive if low-interest public finance or grants are available. Without subsidised borrowing, many projects may not stack up financially. For rural communities this creates dependence on political decisions made elsewhere.

Significant Legal and Governance Complexity
Shared ownership arrangements involve:

• Special Purpose Vehicles (SPVs)
• Joint venture agreements
• Shareholder protections
• Debt finance arrangements
• Refinancing risks
• State aid compliance
  
  

The report repeatedly recommends specialist legal and financial advice. For volunteer-led rural organisations, this complexity may prove overwhelming.

Uncertain Climate Hub Future
The report openly acknowledges that developers may hesitate to partner with Climate Hubs because their future funding and long-term existence remain uncertain.
Communities may question whether ownership structures built around Climate Hubs offer sufficient permanence.

 

Expanding Shared Ownership Across Scotland
Only 32 of Scotland's 343 operational renewable projects currently include shared ownership arrangements.

This indicates substantial room for expansion if barriers can be overcome.

Forestry and Land Scotland Projects
The report highlights emerging opportunities through Forestry and Land Scotland initiatives, including giving communities priority access in certain repowering projects.

For rural areas with significant public land, this could provide more accessible ownership opportunities.

Offshore Community Benefit Reform
The UK Government is expected to consult on mandatory offshore community benefit arrangements. Meanwhile, Scottish Government guidance is under review.

This presents an opportunity for rural and coastal communities to influence how future offshore wealth is distributed.

Building Community Energy Expertise
Shared ownership projects could help develop local skills in governance, finance, energy and economic development.

Rather than remaining passive recipients of benefit funds, communities could become active participants in Scotland's energy transition.

Greater Community Influence
Ownership generally brings greater access to information and influence than traditional consultation processes.

Communities with ownership stakes may gain stronger voices regarding operational decisions, future investment and community outcomes.

Financial Underperformance
Perhaps the greatest threat is that projected returns fail to materialise.

The report's own modelling shows significant sensitivity to changes in revenue, operating costs and financing assumptions. Under lower revenue scenarios, early-year returns can become negative.

Communities could therefore assume financial risk without guaranteed rewards.

Renewable Market Volatility
The report repeatedly references:

• Higher construction costs.
• Supply chain inflation.
• Increased borrowing costs.
• Reduced subsidies.

These factors have already weakened project economics.

All in all, from a rural community perspective, the Regen report demonstrates that shared ownership is technically feasible and potentially beneficial, but far from straightforward.

Its greatest strength is the possibility of creating genuine long-term community wealth from renewable energy developments. However, its greatest weakness is that communities are expected to shoulder substantial financial and governance complexity while accepting relatively modest returns during the early years.

The report presents shared ownership as a strategic opportunity rather than an immediate solution. For many rural communities, particularly those already hosting significant renewable infrastructure, the central question remains whether partial ownership of externally developed projects offers a better outcome than stronger local ownership models, enhanced community benefit arrangements, or greater community control over development itself.

The evidence suggests that shared ownership may become one useful tool within the community energy toolbox. However, it is unlikely to be the transformative solution that some advocates hope for unless accompanied by low-cost public finance, robust governance structures, meaningful local decision-making powers and a clear commitment to ensuring that benefits remain with the communities most directly affected by renewable energy developments.